What Happens Next: A Gallimaufry

melancholic romantic comic cynic. bi & genderqueer. fantasy writer. sysrae on ao3.

*headdesk*

  • Me: As a book recommendation, you might want to check out Delusions of Gender by Cordelia Fine (Kit Fine's daughter) about neurosexism and bad research in popular science books. The ebook is discounted on Amazon right now, and it's a really important read
  • Guy: Heh, I already own it. :-)
  • Me: Awesome!
  • Guy: I've been bitching about this since I was young.
  • Guy: But I also have a lot to learn. I've been meaning to read some good source material on feminism for some time.
  • Me: Cool! I recommend How to Suppress Women's Writing by Joanna Russ.
  • Me: It's a quick read, and extremely relevant.
  • Guy: You know what I reckon the best way to do that is? Keep promoting "chic lit" in the publishing industry :P
  • Guy: There might be some good stuff but can we say "seriously inane" for the most part?
  • Me: Or, alternatively, we can stop assuming that the only genre named for the gender of those who read and write it is, by definition, shit. The fact that 'chick lit' is used as a prejorative is hardly helpful.
  • Guy: Um, dude. It's like you want to get offended.
  • Me: No, this is actually a MASSIVE argument in feminism.
  • Guy: Why not just call it "lit".
  • Me: And when you say, casually, 'Oh, chick lit is rubbish and it's hurting women's writing,' that is basically the definition of the problem at hand.
  • Guy: A lot of it is bad.
  • Me: Why do you say that? On what basis?
  • Guy: And, yes, I do say casual things like that not expecting that I have to cover every instance.
  • Guy: In the same way that I make broad judgements about other things I find inane.
  • Me: I'm not asking you to cover every instance. I'm asking you to see that the casual assumption is itself problematic.
  • Guy: LIke magazines about men's health, cars, etc.
  • Me: Firstly: 'chick lit' is a label bestowed on novels written primarily by and for women. That is the base definition. It says nothing about their content, but if you call a novel 'chick lit', you're instantly inferring that it's not serious literature.
  • Guy: Foz, *sigh*.
  • Me: There is a huge gender bias in publishing, reviewing and literary culture about chick lit books, and the fact that books which just so happen to be by or about women are discounted by calling them that.
  • Guy: *sigh*
  • Me: SIGH.
  • Guy: Attacking the wrong dude gain.
  • Me: [Name removed], seriously: you have said a problematic thing. You are now refusing to admit the possibility that I'm right to call it problematic.
  • Guy: Um, I see no refusal in what I wrote about above. I can only "refuse" if you ask me to do something.
  • Me: More to the point, you just complained - casually, which is worse - to a female author that promoting chick lit helps to suppress women's writing.
  • Guy: i.e. you must write "Do you refuse to admit there is a problem".
  • Guy: Yes, and you didn't even let me get to my point.
  • Me: If you agree it's problematic, then why complain that I mentioned it?
  • Guy: Hint: it's different to what you think it was.
  • Guy: And it would be nice if you would let me finish.
  • Guy: So, will you allow me to do that.
  • Guy: Before brow beating me?
  • Me: ....
  • Guy: Is that a "yes"?
  • Me: Go ahead. Make your point.
  • Guy: Chick lit, as I have heard the term used in mainstream media is about "typically feminine" things (note the quotes).
  • Guy: e.g. relationships, fashion, etc.
  • Guy: By promoting this as the model of feminine literature it crowds out the other stuff.
  • Guy: If you wish to reclaim this word, I'm all for that.
  • Guy: But if you wish to promote this as the sole form of literature you starve the other good stuff of oxygen.
  • Guy: So, by all means, have an argument about the assumption it's shit.
  • Guy: I'm not arguing about its merits.
  • Guy: Well, a little.
  • Guy: I don't care for it personally and do think some of what I have casually read is inane.
  • Guy: (But no more so than all the inane crap guys write)
  • Guy: So... yeah, point finished.
  • Me: OK, firstly, the assumption that 'feminine things' = inane literature is deeply sexist. What it says is that in order to write well, women have to write either about men or in a masculine style; or, worse still, that anything traditionally feminine is inherently inferior, unworthy and uninteresting.
  • Guy: That's NOT what I'm saying.
  • Guy: STOP before going on!
  • Guy: Let's clarify what I am saying.
  • Guy: You are talking to ME Foz.
  • Me: Secondly, while there are some authors who claim the label of 'chick lit' openly, most don't: it's a derogatory term foisted on their work by others who want to disparage it as being by and for women.
  • Guy: You need to ask people to clarify rather than launching into arguments based on misconceptions about what they are saying.
  • Me: Yes, and you're saying offensive shit!
  • Guy: I'm not listening until you address these issues.
  • Guy: You are launching into polemic without asking for any clarification.
  • Guy: This is not a communication style I care for.
  • Me: ....
  • Guy: You automatically deem me guilty of stuff
  • Guy: Without even knowing whether I am actually saying that or not.
  • Me: I'm attacking your arguments, not you.
  • Guy: You aren't even doing that.
  • Guy: You don't know what my arguments are.
  • Me: And you're reacting personally because you can't bear the thought you might accidentally have abosrbed some problematic beliefs by accident.
  • Me: You're not even letting me make mine!
  • Guy: If you'll give me some time I can go back and find a handful of misconceptions in what you've already wrote.
  • Me: You're dominating this conversation, like you do whenever we talk about this, and claiming that because I know you, OBVIOUSLY you can't be making an offensive point, and that the solution is to just LET YOU TALK MORE.
  • Guy: There is an assumption that I "must be saying something offensive"
  • Me: You are!
  • Me: And I am tumbling this conversation.
  • Me: Because I am SICK of this shit.
  • Guy: Foz, if you make this public I will be very upset.
  • Me: I am LIVID with you right now.
  • Me: I'll take your name off it. But I will post the conversation.
  • Guy: And I do NOT consent to it.
  • Guy: I do not consent to any use of my words.
  • Guy: You are breaking my consent.
  • Guy: This is a private conversation.
  • Guy: If you wish to paraphrase go ahead.
  • Guy: Be aware it will mean the end of any kind of friendship between us to.
  • Guy: We still live in a world where consent matters.
  • Me: Honestly? I can't keep being friends with you under these conditions.
  • Me: You're so condescending it physically hurts me.
  • Guy: Honestly, I think you ideology is hurting you.
  • Guy: I am a perfectly reasonable person.
  • Me: What, feminism?
  • Guy: Have a perfectly reasonable conversation with you.
  • Guy: Not feminism.
  • Guy: YOUR ideology.
  • Guy: The bastard chimera of a misused ideology that you have crafted for yourself.
  • Me: No, you're not being reasonable. You're being a privileged entitled jerk who thinks his right to explain every single thing he says the second I question it is more important than maybe learning you're wrong.
  • Guy: I hope in a few years you apologise for this.
  • Guy: I am quietly leaving you to your misplaced rage.
  • Me: I have a similar hope.
  • Me: I'll leave you to your misplaced self-righteousness.
  • Guy: Don't tumble this.
  • Guy: Can I at least ask that from you?
  • Me: You can ask nothing from me.
  • Guy: Umm, yes I can.
  • Guy: You can refuse.
  • Me: Then I refuse.
  • Guy: So be it.
  • Guy: We are no longer friends.
  • Me: Works for me.
  • Guy: Bye.
  • Me: Bye.
  • Me: *headdesk*
  • .
  1. ladykayura reblogged this from fozmeadows
  2. violenceisbeautiful reblogged this from metaconstipatedthinking-blo-blog
  3. metaconstipatedthinking-blo-blog reblogged this from carnivaloftherandom
  4. carnivaloftherandom reblogged this from fozmeadows and added:
    ^ This is what mansplaining and co-opting to derail, looks like.
  5. clpolk reblogged this from sylviasybil
  6. picklemethis reblogged this from lynnejamneck-blog
  7. lynnejamneck-blog reblogged this from fozmeadows
  8. lynnejamneck-blog said: Holy shitballs. Reblogging.
  9. independentideals reblogged this from fozmeadows
  10. kogiopsis said: “ We still live in a world where consent matters” WHAT? Am I misreading or was that… a casual callback to sexual consent? Ye gods, I’m amazed that you got through this conversation without breaking something.
  11. dumdeeedum reblogged this from therealycats
  12. sylviasybil reblogged this from moniquill
  13. shitty reblogged this from onihcinimkcin
  14. onihcinimkcin reblogged this from moniquill
  15. fozmeadows posted this